"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.Extra caritatem nulla salus.In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness". सर्वभूतहितἌνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas GandhiY dduw bo'r diolch.

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

Trivial to be sure, but why French?

The pan-European language of diplomacy?

Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.Extra caritatem nulla salus.In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness". सर्वभूतहितἌνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas GandhiY dduw bo'r diolch.

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

Trivial to be sure, but why French?

The pan-European language of diplomacy?

A bit old fashioned. English is today's lingua franca of European diplomacy. It replaced French after WWII.

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

Trivial to be sure, but why French?

The pan-European language of diplomacy?

A bit old fashioned. English is today's lingua franca of European diplomacy. It replaced French after WWII.

Isn't the substance (and the very fact) of the letter, however "trivial", more important than whether it was written in French or English?

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

Trivial to be sure, but why French?

The pan-European language of diplomacy?

A bit old fashioned. English is today's lingua franca of European diplomacy. It replaced French after WWII.

Isn't the substance (and the very fact) of the letter, however "trivial", more important than whether it was written in French or English?

I was saying the choice of language was of trivial concern. Simply perplexed at its selection.

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

Trivial to be sure, but why French?

The pan-European language of diplomacy?

A bit old fashioned. English is today's lingua franca of European diplomacy. It replaced French after WWII.

Isn't the substance (and the very fact) of the letter, however "trivial", more important than whether it was written in French or English?

I was saying the choice of language was of trivial concern. Simply perplexed at its selection.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

In our Patriarchate St. Peter, its founder, is the patron saint of the Orthodox world.

Constantinople is not the Turkish capital, even according to the Turks.

Doesn't inspire much confidence in its ability to grasp other facts.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

In our Patriarchate St. Peter, its founder, is the patron saint of the Orthodox world.

Constantinople is not the Turkish capital, even according to the Turks.

Doesn't inspire much confidence in its ability to grasp other facts.

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter..."

God forbid anyone focus on the *message*!

So Vatican Radio got it wrong and Ankara is the Turkish capital and not Constantinople, er, Istanbul. And, not being "Orthodox", maybe Vatican Radio confused St. Andrew as being patron saint of the EP (see this: Saint Andrew (Greek: Ἀνδρέας, Andreas; early 1st century—mid to late 1st century AD), called in the Orthodox tradition Prōtoklētos, or the First-called, is a Christian Apostle and the brother of Saint Peter. The name "Andrew" (Greek: manly, brave, from ἀνδρεία, Andreia, "manhood, valour"), like other Greek names, appears to have been common among the Jews from the 3rd or 2nd century BC. No Hebrew or Aramaic name is recorded for him. He is considered the founder and first bishop of the Church of Byzantium and is consequently the patron saint of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.) with being patron saint of "the Orthodox world". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Andrew (source cited. S1389)

But....that's *far*, **far** more important than the message, isn't it?

So much for "working together in the common search for truth and unity".

Perhaps instead of looking for nits to pick it might be more constructive all around if, when spotting an error, to gently correct, in love and charity, the one who made it. Or, if the error is of little import in the grand scheme of things, to just overlook it.

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

In our Patriarchate St. Peter, its founder, is the patron saint of the Orthodox world.

Constantinople is not the Turkish capital, even according to the Turks.

Doesn't inspire much confidence in its ability to grasp other facts.

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter..."

God forbid anyone focus on the *message*!

So Vatican Radio got it wrong and Ankara is the Turkish capital and not Constantinople, er, Istanbul. And, not being "Orthodox", maybe Vatican Radio confused St. Andrew as being patron saint of the EP (see this: Saint Andrew (Greek: Ἀνδρέας, Andreas; early 1st century—mid to late 1st century AD), called in the Orthodox tradition Prōtoklētos, or the First-called, is a Christian Apostle and the brother of Saint Peter. The name "Andrew" (Greek: manly, brave, from ἀνδρεία, Andreia, "manhood, valour"), like other Greek names, appears to have been common among the Jews from the 3rd or 2nd century BC. No Hebrew or Aramaic name is recorded for him. He is considered the founder and first bishop of the Church of Byzantium and is consequently the patron saint of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.) with being patron saint of "the Orthodox world".

But....that's *far*, **far** more important than the message, isn't it?

So much for "working together in the common search for truth and unity".

it just showed that it skips the truth part to impose its idea of unity. You conviently forget that we have danced this waltz before. And no, little has changed.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

In our Patriarchate St. Peter, its founder, is the patron saint of the Orthodox world.

Constantinople is not the Turkish capital, even according to the Turks.

Doesn't inspire much confidence in its ability to grasp other facts.

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter..."

God forbid anyone focus on the *message*!

So Vatican Radio got it wrong and Ankara is the Turkish capital and not Constantinople, er, Istanbul. And, not being "Orthodox", maybe Vatican Radio confused St. Andrew as being patron saint of the EP (see this: Saint Andrew (Greek: Ἀνδρέας, Andreas; early 1st century—mid to late 1st century AD), called in the Orthodox tradition Prōtoklētos, or the First-called, is a Christian Apostle and the brother of Saint Peter. The name "Andrew" (Greek: manly, brave, from ἀνδρεία, Andreia, "manhood, valour"), like other Greek names, appears to have been common among the Jews from the 3rd or 2nd century BC. No Hebrew or Aramaic name is recorded for him. He is considered the founder and first bishop of the Church of Byzantium and is consequently the patron saint of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.) with being patron saint of "the Orthodox world".

But....that's *far*, **far** more important than the message, isn't it?

So much for "working together in the common search for truth and unity".

it just showed that it skips the truth part to impose its idea of unity. You conviently forget that we have danced this waltz before. And no, little has changed.

Do you have a map for that?

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter sent by Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew 1st of Constantinoplel to mark Wednesday’s feast of St Andrew, patron saint of the Orthodox world. The letter, written in French, was presented to the Patriarch in the Turkish capital by a delegation from the Pontifical council for Christian Unity, headed by Cardinal Kurt Koch."

In our Patriarchate St. Peter, its founder, is the patron saint of the Orthodox world.

Constantinople is not the Turkish capital, even according to the Turks.

Doesn't inspire much confidence in its ability to grasp other facts.

"Catholics and Orthodox face exactly the same challenges in the cultural, social, economic, political and ecological spheres. Faced with the urgency of these tasks, we have the duty to show the world that we are people of a mature faith, people who – despite our tensions – are capable of working together in the common search for truth and unity.

That’s the message at the heart of a letter..."

God forbid anyone focus on the *message*!

So Vatican Radio got it wrong and Ankara is the Turkish capital and not Constantinople, er, Istanbul. And, not being "Orthodox", maybe Vatican Radio confused St. Andrew as being patron saint of the EP (see this: Saint Andrew (Greek: Ἀνδρέας, Andreas; early 1st century—mid to late 1st century AD), called in the Orthodox tradition Prōtoklētos, or the First-called, is a Christian Apostle and the brother of Saint Peter. The name "Andrew" (Greek: manly, brave, from ἀνδρεία, Andreia, "manhood, valour"), like other Greek names, appears to have been common among the Jews from the 3rd or 2nd century BC. No Hebrew or Aramaic name is recorded for him. He is considered the founder and first bishop of the Church of Byzantium and is consequently the patron saint of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.) with being patron saint of "the Orthodox world".

But....that's *far*, **far** more important than the message, isn't it?

So much for "working together in the common search for truth and unity".

it just showed that it skips the truth part to impose its idea of unity. You conviently forget that we have danced this waltz before. And no, little has changed.

Do you have a map for that?

Or a picture of the Romanian Eparch of Italy?

« Last Edit: November 30, 2011, 10:33:46 PM by WetCatechumen »

Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence

I suspect, based on where Patriarch Bartholomew was educated, German, French and Italian are the most compatible languages between the two hierarchs. I excluded Latin because it is too impersonal and prone to debates about interpretation. German and Italian might be construed as a Vatican-centric determination of what language should be used for correspondence (German might have additional problems I will not get into). French, on the other hand is the language of love, and perfectly appropriate for the occasion.

Logged

If you cannot remember everything, instead of everything, I beg you, remember this without fail, that not to share our own wealth with the poor is theft from the poor and deprivation of their means of life; we do not possess our own wealth but theirs. If we have this attitude, we will certainly offer our money; and by nourishing Christ in poverty here and laying up great profit hereafter, we will be able to attain the good things which are to come. - St. John Chrysostom

I suspect, based on where Patriarch Bartholomew was educated, German, French and Italian are the most compatible languages between the two hierarchs. I excluded Latin because it is too impersonal and prone to debates about interpretation. German and Italian might be construed as a Vatican-centric determination of what language should be used for correspondence (German might have additional problems I will not get into). French, on the other hand is the language of love, and perfectly appropriate for the occasion.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

If you will, you can become all flame.Extra caritatem nulla salus.In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness". सर्वभूतहितἌνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas GandhiY dduw bo'r diolch.

I suspect, based on where Patriarch Bartholomew was educated, German, French and Italian are the most compatible languages between the two hierarchs. I excluded Latin because it is too impersonal and prone to debates about interpretation. German and Italian might be construed as a Vatican-centric determination of what language should be used for correspondence (German might have additional problems I will not get into). French, on the other hand is the language of love, and perfectly appropriate for the occasion.

See people? This is thinking and a reasonable explanation.

Makes perfect sense.

Merci!

LOL In diplomacy, especially in diplomatic negotiations the usage of specific Language is no trivial matter. it is calculated and deliberate with intended unsaid yet understood meaning( it also reflects and conveys positive or negative intentions). carelessness in language of choice could send the wrong political message further alienating the other party one attempts to negotiate with. Those engaged in diplomacy are aware of this. so your question was in my opinion was neither trivial nor irrelevant. As opus clearly demonstrated it is an important part of the message. it is usually decided bilaterally what language to use to communicate between the two, it gets a more complicated when its a multilateral negotiation, anyway you know what I mean.

Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.

Wait, Ss. Cyril and Methodius are some kind of patron saints of Orthodoxy? I knew I screwed up when I picked up them as my RC confirmation saints! Oops.

Regarding language in ecumenical exchanges, I don't know about official policy (if there is one) of the churches, but I would think that this is a pragmatic concern, rather than trying to choose a language that best conveys "love" or some abstract idea like that (a strange, arbitrary notion; I've never felt French to be particularly "lovely"). Like English in India, I would think that French fulfills a few important constraints imposed by the nature of the communication: It's neither side's native language, nor is it the native language of a strongly Catholic or Orthodox identified people (hardly any French are practicing Catholics), so it is relatively politically neutral. It seems like a decent choice, all things considered.

Although my ignorance is huge about many, many things, I *am* aware that language is extremely important, and that there are many reasons why one who is multilingual and addressing another polyglot chooses one language above others. As I said earlier, why French was chosen in this instance is best asked of and answered by the person(s) writing the letter. All of our speculation about it is nothing more than electronic hot air, which abounds beyond belief on the internet and on this board.

While the language one uses may or may not be part of what one is attempting to communicate, the language itself is a medium, is it not? Am I mistaken in thinking that the message, whatever the language used to deliver it, is the *main* thing, if not necessarily the only thing, of import?

If, indeed, the message (i.e. that which is contained in the letter) is of highest, though not necessarily of sole priority, why then what seems here to be the greater focus on the language used to deliver the message rather than the message itself?

Although my ignorance is huge about many, many things, I *am* aware that language is extremely important, and that there are many reasons why one who is multilingual and addressing another polyglot chooses one language above others. As I said earlier, why French was chosen in this instance is best asked of and answered by the person(s) writing the letter. All of our speculation about it is nothing more than electronic hot air, which abounds beyond belief on the internet and on this board.

While the language one uses may or may not be part of what one is attempting to communicate, the language itself is a medium, is it not? Am I mistaken in thinking that the message, whatever the language used to deliver it, is the *main* thing, if not necessarily the only thing, of import?

If, indeed, the message (i.e. that which is contained in the letter) is of highest, though not necessarily of sole priority, why then what seems here to be the greater focus on the language used to deliver the message rather than the message itself?

If you will, you can become all flame.Extra caritatem nulla salus.In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness". सर्वभूतहितἌνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas GandhiY dduw bo'r diolch.

Although my ignorance is huge about many, many things, I *am* aware that language is extremely important, and that there are many reasons why one who is multilingual and addressing another polyglot chooses one language above others. As I said earlier, why French was chosen in this instance is best asked of and answered by the person(s) writing the letter. All of our speculation about it is nothing more than electronic hot air, which abounds beyond belief on the internet and on this board.

While the language one uses may or may not be part of what one is attempting to communicate, the language itself is a medium, is it not? Am I mistaken in thinking that the message, whatever the language used to deliver it, is the *main* thing, if not necessarily the only thing, of import?

If, indeed, the message (i.e. that which is contained in the letter) is of highest, though not necessarily of sole priority, why then what seems here to be the greater focus on the language used to deliver the message rather than the message itself?

I *knew* someone would dredge that up . So, whatever words I use in a given language will mean the same thing in that language no matter what they are, right? I mean, if language is a medium, and the medium is the message, each language is a different message no matter what the words are? Paleeeze....give me a break!

Although my ignorance is huge about many, many things, I *am* aware that language is extremely important, and that there are many reasons why one who is multilingual and addressing another polyglot chooses one language above others. As I said earlier, why French was chosen in this instance is best asked of and answered by the person(s) writing the letter. All of our speculation about it is nothing more than electronic hot air, which abounds beyond belief on the internet and on this board.

While the language one uses may or may not be part of what one is attempting to communicate, the language itself is a medium, is it not? Am I mistaken in thinking that the message, whatever the language used to deliver it, is the *main* thing, if not necessarily the only thing, of import?

If, indeed, the message (i.e. that which is contained in the letter) is of highest, though not necessarily of sole priority, why then what seems here to be the greater focus on the language used to deliver the message rather than the message itself?

I *knew* someone would dredge that up . So, whatever words I use in a given language will mean the same thing in that language no matter what they are, right? I mean, if language is a medium, and the medium is the message, each language is a different message no matter what the words are? Paleeeze....give me a break!

Although my ignorance is huge about many, many things, I *am* aware that language is extremely important, and that there are many reasons why one who is multilingual and addressing another polyglot chooses one language above others. As I said earlier, why French was chosen in this instance is best asked of and answered by the person(s) writing the letter. All of our speculation about it is nothing more than electronic hot air, which abounds beyond belief on the internet and on this board.

While the language one uses may or may not be part of what one is attempting to communicate, the language itself is a medium, is it not? Am I mistaken in thinking that the message, whatever the language used to deliver it, is the *main* thing, if not necessarily the only thing, of import?

If, indeed, the message (i.e. that which is contained in the letter) is of highest, though not necessarily of sole priority, why then what seems here to be the greater focus on the language used to deliver the message rather than the message itself?

I *knew* someone would dredge that up . So, whatever words I use in a given language will mean the same thing in that language no matter what they are, right? I mean, if language is a medium, and the medium is the message, each language is a different message no matter what the words are? Paleeeze....give me a break!

Quote from: Martin Heidegger

What is spoken is never, and in no. language, what is said.

And this applies also to the *written* word? (Remember, we're talking here of a written letter.) If so, just what *is* Heidegger saying?? And...what does that "say" about Holy Scripture?

Yes, as noted by ialmisery, the letter was presented at the Patriarchal Church of St. George at the Phanar, in Istanbul, which, when it was referred to as Constantinople, was the capital of the Byzantine Empire and the Ottoman Empire. Since the establishment of the so called Turkish Republic, Ataturk established his capital at Ankara. Typical of the RC's, though, considering St. Andrew the patron of the Orthodox Church probably because he is the patron of the Church of Constantinople.

But, I do agree with the substance of His Holiness' message. Both the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church should acknowledge that one thousand years of separation has resulted in differences in doctrine and theology, but acknowledge the 1,000 year history of their essential oneness in faith, and should establish an entity that would jointly proclaim the message of Christ to the world, along with other Trinitarian Christian denominations, if there are any left who don't ordain women and homosexuals. The world needs the message of Jesus Christ more so today than ever, a world overwhelmed by hedonism and the Moslem heresy.

Although my ignorance is huge about many, many things, I *am* aware that language is extremely important, and that there are many reasons why one who is multilingual and addressing another polyglot chooses one language above others. As I said earlier, why French was chosen in this instance is best asked of and answered by the person(s) writing the letter. All of our speculation about it is nothing more than electronic hot air, which abounds beyond belief on the internet and on this board.

While the language one uses may or may not be part of what one is attempting to communicate, the language itself is a medium, is it not? Am I mistaken in thinking that the message, whatever the language used to deliver it, is the *main* thing, if not necessarily the only thing, of import?

If, indeed, the message (i.e. that which is contained in the letter) is of highest, though not necessarily of sole priority, why then what seems here to be the greater focus on the language used to deliver the message rather than the message itself?

I *knew* someone would dredge that up . So, whatever words I use in a given language will mean the same thing in that language no matter what they are, right? I mean, if language is a medium, and the medium is the message, each language is a different message no matter what the words are? Paleeeze....give me a break!

Quote from: Martin Heidegger

What is spoken is never, and in no. language, what is said.

And this applies also to the *written* word? (Remember, we're talking here of a written letter.) If so, just what *is* Heidegger saying?? And...what does that "say" about Holy Scripture?

The term "non sequitur" comes to mind here. Now, if that's an incorrect use of it, then how 'bout "just plain nonsense"? Because, that's what you seem to be writing.

Quote from: Martin Heidegger

Those in the crossing must in the end know what is mistaken by all urging for intelligibility: that every thinking of being, all philosophy, can never be confirmed by "facts," ie, by beings. Making itself intelligible is suicide for philosophy. Those who idolize "facts" never notice that their idols only shine in a borrowed light. They are also meant not to notice this; for thereupon they would have to be at a loss and therefore useless. But idolizers and idols are used wherever gods are in flight and so announce their nearness.

Although my ignorance is huge about many, many things, I *am* aware that language is extremely important, and that there are many reasons why one who is multilingual and addressing another polyglot chooses one language above others. As I said earlier, why French was chosen in this instance is best asked of and answered by the person(s) writing the letter. All of our speculation about it is nothing more than electronic hot air, which abounds beyond belief on the internet and on this board.

While the language one uses may or may not be part of what one is attempting to communicate, the language itself is a medium, is it not? Am I mistaken in thinking that the message, whatever the language used to deliver it, is the *main* thing, if not necessarily the only thing, of import?

If, indeed, the message (i.e. that which is contained in the letter) is of highest, though not necessarily of sole priority, why then what seems here to be the greater focus on the language used to deliver the message rather than the message itself?

I *knew* someone would dredge that up . So, whatever words I use in a given language will mean the same thing in that language no matter what they are, right? I mean, if language is a medium, and the medium is the message, each language is a different message no matter what the words are? Paleeeze....give me a break!

Quote from: Martin Heidegger

What is spoken is never, and in no. language, what is said.

And this applies also to the *written* word? (Remember, we're talking here of a written letter.) If so, just what *is* Heidegger saying?? And...what does that "say" about Holy Scripture?

Although my ignorance is huge about many, many things, I *am* aware that language is extremely important, and that there are many reasons why one who is multilingual and addressing another polyglot chooses one language above others. As I said earlier, why French was chosen in this instance is best asked of and answered by the person(s) writing the letter. All of our speculation about it is nothing more than electronic hot air, which abounds beyond belief on the internet and on this board.

While the language one uses may or may not be part of what one is attempting to communicate, the language itself is a medium, is it not? Am I mistaken in thinking that the message, whatever the language used to deliver it, is the *main* thing, if not necessarily the only thing, of import?

If, indeed, the message (i.e. that which is contained in the letter) is of highest, though not necessarily of sole priority, why then what seems here to be the greater focus on the language used to deliver the message rather than the message itself?

I *knew* someone would dredge that up . So, whatever words I use in a given language will mean the same thing in that language no matter what they are, right? I mean, if language is a medium, and the medium is the message, each language is a different message no matter what the words are? Paleeeze....give me a break!

The term "non sequitur" comes to mind here. Now, if that's an incorrect use of it, then how 'bout "just plain nonsense"? Because, that's what you seem to be writing.

I need sources on all of these Martin Heidegger quotes, or links. You both have 24 hours. In fact, the next person who quotes ANYTHING without providing a link or citation will be warned. You have all be warned.

The term "non sequitur" comes to mind here. Now, if that's an incorrect use of it, then how 'bout "just plain nonsense"? Because, that's what you seem to be writing.

Quote from: Martin Heidegger

Those in the crossing must in the end know what is mistaken by all urging for intelligibility: that every thinking of being, all philosophy, can never be confirmed by "facts," ie, by beings. Making itself intelligible is suicide for philosophy. Those who idolize "facts" never notice that their idols only shine in a borrowed light. They are also meant not to notice this; for thereupon they would have to be at a loss and therefore useless. But idolizers and idols are used wherever gods are in flight and so announce their nearness.

Do *you* have anything to contribute to this non-discussion, of your own, besides unattributed quotes by Martin Heidegger without even any kind of contextual explanation?

At a quick glance, I thought the title read: Pope Benedict to Ordain Patriarch Bartholomew

Yes, I did a double take and realized I had initially read the title wrong.

Logged

The memory of God should be treasured in our hearts like the precious pearl mentioned in the Holy Gospel. Our life's goal should be to nurture and contemplate God always within, and never let it depart, for this steadfastness will drive demons away from us. - Paraphrased from St. Philotheus of Sinai Writings from the Philokalia: On Prayer of the Heart,Translated from the Russian by E. Kadloubovksy and G.E.H. Palmer, Faber and Faber, London, Boston, 1992 printing.

Although my ignorance is huge about many, many things, I *am* aware that language is extremely important, and that there are many reasons why one who is multilingual and addressing another polyglot chooses one language above others. As I said earlier, why French was chosen in this instance is best asked of and answered by the person(s) writing the letter. All of our speculation about it is nothing more than electronic hot air, which abounds beyond belief on the internet and on this board.

While the language one uses may or may not be part of what one is attempting to communicate, the language itself is a medium, is it not? Am I mistaken in thinking that the message, whatever the language used to deliver it, is the *main* thing, if not necessarily the only thing, of import?

If, indeed, the message (i.e. that which is contained in the letter) is of highest, though not necessarily of sole priority, why then what seems here to be the greater focus on the language used to deliver the message rather than the message itself?

Forgive me if I have misunderstood these things!

Come on J Michael, language is very important in negotiations, issues such as sovereignty and political dominance (in this case Church governance) can be conveyed with the type of language one uses. They took care not to antagonize the other in these matters where the usage of one’s language can be understood as a concession of certain political power or weight to the other etc. Now your indignation over the inquirey about the language used although understandable is not entirely justified in the real world of diplomacy. so calm down and let us reason together. :angel:When these letters are written people(those in charge of writing them) are concerned not only about what is being actually said with the words, but also the language used to convey them. In this case the careful selection of the neutral language French speaks well on the good will of the communicant as well as it successfully avoids any political misunderstanding.

People who know of the importance of language in diplomatic interactions have valid point to look into the type of language used as well as the content of the language. It is part of the message. The UN is a good example, if you would care to look into it, that publications of official documents have to wait until available in all the official languages of the UN. Just because it might mean the same in English they do not rush to publish the English version first and wait on the others.

In this case there is a valid reason why the article mentioned that the Letter was in French. J Michael relax no one is arguing that the message of the words in the letter are not important, however it is a fair question and a valid one to look into why the Papal letter was written in French, the inquiry does not undermine or downplay the significance of what the letter says in words. You cannot dictate people to look into the meaning of the words only and ignore the significance of the language used. We can look at both, it should not be an either or thing. In the real world, such things are not mere speculations but rather informed and educated understandings of the significance of language in both secular and religious politics.

As we are many in here who are discussing this event, you have to give leeway for people to look at it from different angles it only serves to enrich our understanding IMO. So relax my brother we are all on the same page, you are free to discuss what the words say , as I am or any other person is free to inquire what the significance of the language used is, while holding my peace in regards to commenting on what the words say. I will not downplay the significance of the words as you should not down play the significance of the language used and get indignant over people who inquire about it. I hope we are having an intelligent and civil discussion, where educated inquiry and analysis of certain things are allowed, and we do not neccessarily have to ask the writters why they wrote it in french as you seem to think and suggest we do.

peace

Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.